Ceramic Bearings for added speed (Page 2)

Couple of comments:

Let's not forget that FSA sells ceramic bottom bracket bearings and I am sure, make plenty of money from such sales.

I believe it is pretty well documented that around 85% of the drag on a cyclist on a tri bike at 20mph is aerodynamic.  That leaves us 15% of drag due to other reasons and clearly, bearing friction would be one.  However, tire rolling resistance would be at least as big, probably more.  But for argument's sake, let's split the remaining 15% evenly between bearing friction and rolling resistance of tires.  If so, wouldn't we be talking about 4% of 7.5% reduction in drag?  I get a .3% improvement in overall efficiency, not the 4% claimed. 

In a vacuum, there would be a greater benefit.  I would like to try doing a race in a vacuum because my VO2 max pretty much sucks (OK, I didn't really intend the pun, just came out that way), so I think this would be a great equalizer for me.  I would certainly pick up a set of ceramic bearings beforehand.

Greg

I'm focusing on getting something w/ 2 wheels, handlebars, maybe a seat, for my 1st 2 tri's this year. At 45, I can't imagine becoming efficient enough at anything that would make ceremic balls worth while

Edited by jimmyL 2010-01-25 10:01 AM

My personal opinion, and I work for an aerospace company that designs high speed (5,000-40,000 RPM) rotating equipment: Ceramic is not neededon a bike. Ceramic is most applicable for high temperature applications. We ride 500 RPM (wheels) and 100 RPM (crank) for what ... 100 to 1000 hours per year? That's not a tough duty cycle for a well made metallic bearing. Your washing machine or your ceiling fan probably has a similar duty cycle!

But $40-$200 extra is not a big upgrade for a bike costing $1000-$5000 ... so when you need to upgrade, go for ceramic if you want to. But I haven't.

Edited by jsselle 2010-01-25 11:54 AM